Skip to main content

Full text of "The Prince Regent's style: decorative arts in England, 1800-1830. [Exhibition"

See other formats


z/^y X" 



v 



'y 



— V 



-^ /■■ 



s ^T»*»s/ %y 



S5;S> 



^ NSTITUTION *^N0liniliSNI_NVIN0SHilWS*^S3 I H VH 8 n_LI B RAR I ES SM1THS0NIAN_INSTITI 






5^V 
'^^ 5 

_ z 

"s3iavaan libraries Smithsonian institution NoiiniiisNi nvinoshiiws S3iyv 

riNSTITUTION'" ^^'■'■"■'•'■'■^'^'''^^"^^^"■'■"'^^w^^ ' ^^^ ^ ''^~'-' ^ '^^f" ^S^SMITHSONIAN~INSTIT 

j^sg I avy a n'^ LI b r ar i es 'smithsonian_institution NoiiniiiSNi_NV!NOSHiiws'^S3 1 y\ 






M 




£/) 



^institution NoimiiiSNi nvinoshiiws S3iavaan libraries Smithsonian instit 

t- 2 ^ [I '^'' S *" 5 > — -.r- 




3 S3,yyya|-,~LIBRARIES^SMITHS0NIAN INSTITUTION^^NOIiniliSNI ^NVIN0SHilWS^S3 I y\ 




^^INSTITUTION *^^°'-'-"-'-'-'-SNI_NVIN0SHilWS^S3 I y VH a n^LI B RAR I ES*^SMITHSONIANJNSTIT 
en 

o X;SosS^ ~' o 

_ 2 _J 2 

s''s3iHvyan libraries Smithsonian institution NoiiniiiSNi nvinoshiiws S3iy' 





N~INSTITUTION MOIiniliSNI NVINOSHIIWS S3iyVyan LIBRARIES SMITHSONIAN INSTI' 




s S3iyvyan libraries Smithsonian institution NoiiniiiSNi nvinoshiiws S3iy 



z m 



■^■^ e 05 — ± w £ (/> ■ 

ITHSONIAN INSTITUTION NOIiniliSNI NVINOSHimS S3iyvyan LIBRARIES SMITHSONI^ 
z -, en 2 w . z ■, ^ 



^ ••-■ ? w — z w -'^- z 

NOSHiiws S3idvyan libraries Smithsonian institution NoiiniiisNi NvmosHiiv 





1ITHS0NIAN institution NOIiniliSNI NVINOSHilWS SBiyvyail LIBRARIES SMITHSONl/ 




riNOSHllWS S3iaVyan~LIBRARIES SMITHSONiAN~INSTITUTION NOIiniliSNI NVINOSHlll/ 




2 t/5 * 2 CO '■ 2 "' 

1ITHS0NIAN INSTITUTION NOIiniliSNI NVINOSHilWS S3iyvyan LIBRARIES SMITHSONU 




nN0SHllWS_S3l8V8an LIBRARIES SMITHSONIAN^INSTITUTION NOIinillSNI^NVINOSHlll/ 

^3 .^?|r^ l(IC ^l? ^ 






'■ — en _ </> — 

/IITHSONIAN INSTITUTION NOIiniliSNI NVINOSHilWS S3l8VyBn LI B RAR I ES SMITHSONl, 






i/IN0SHilWS'"S3 I y Vaa n^LI BRAR I ES^'SMITHSONIAN "institution NOIiniliSNI_NVINOSHlll 




MITHSONIAN INSTITUTION NOIiniliSNI NVINOSHilWS S3iyvyan LIBRARIES SMITHSONl 




viNosHiiws S3iyvyan libraries Smithsonian institution NoiiniiiSNi nvinoshu 

W 2 ... (/5 -z. V ^ Z ^ ^ 



d-l*/- 




50ZO 



THE, 

PRINCE REGENT'S 

STYLE 

Decorative Arts in England, 1800-1830 




THE COOPER UNION MUSEUM 
FOR THE ARTS OF DECORATION 



In assembling material for the exhibition, the Museum has received 
most helpful suggestions and information from the following, to 
whom are given most grateful thanks: 

Anthony Dale 

George E. Dix, Jr. 

Carl Federer 

Miss Josephine Howell 

Mrs. Daisy R. Irving 

Alexander Lewis 

Joseph Lombardo 

William McCarthy 

Clifford Musgrave 

William B. Riordan 

Douglas Robertson 

Meyric R. Rogers 

Mr. and Mrs. Alexander Schaffer 

Jack Wallace 

Mrs. John Hay Whitney 

Miss Alice Winchester 

The hanging of the wallpapers Chinese Pond and Chinese Dado in the "Royal 
Pavilion Alcove" was most generously provided by Mr. Benjamin Piazza. 

{The drawing illustrated on the cover is No. 6 in the Catalogue) 



Copyright 1953 by The Cooper Union Museum for the Arts of Decoration 



IHTI^OBUCTIO: 



L. 



/ike most princes, George Augustus Frederick was born to acclamation, 
the salutes of cannon, and the prompt affection of the populace. His heredity 
was unpromising, and his parents were out of favor. The Hanoverians had 
ruled Great Britain and Ireland since 1714. It was 1762, and their lumbering 
provincial mentalities, though spurred to relative animation by Robert 
Walpole, Pitt and Chatham, were still hardly nimble enough to walk the 
road of kingship with elasticity and pride. Yet this Prince of Wales, first son 
of George III and Charlotte, was an anomaly among his kinsmen. It seemed 
as if, after six generations, the diluted Stuart blood had thickened and 
warmed again in the veins of a handsome, headstrong, precocious child. 

He was educated under the discipline first of the Bishop of Chester, then 
of the Bishop of Lichfield, with sundry sub-preceptors, governors and tutors. 
He mastered French, German, Italian, Latin and English (the last a new- 
fangled accomplishment in the family). At the Bower Lodge, Kew, and 
Windsor, George and his brothers were drilled and seasoned in husbandry, 
fencing, drawing, deportment, deployment and campaigning, elocution, and 
the stifling solemnities of court etiquette. Schedules were rigorous, and liv- 
ing was plain. In the midst of a kingdom whose colonies were greater than 
any save Spain's, the monarch, "the royal button-maker," at home lived the 
life of a niggling autocrat. To be sure, the Queen took limning from Gains- 
borough, and the King was taught architecture by Sir William Chambers. 
But they were an island within an island, surrounded but not irrigated by 
the currents that carried Johnson and Sheridan, Chesterfield and Sir Joshua 
Reynolds, Blake and Gibbon past on the outspread stream. These parents 
did not nag, nor were they unloving in their arrested way. In the matter of 
regulating an exception, they were simply benighted — well-meaning, not at 
all ill-natured, narrow, fond — but benighted. Under their pedantic restraints 
the Prince learned to be a dissembler, to be devious when his reasonable 
requests for independence were denied, and to venture clandestine solaces 
that were unwholesome and ignoble. 

The discord had become public knowledge by 1779. A commission in the 
army, where his fractious spirit might have been tamed and sublimated, was 
withheld; he was forbidden a share in royal functions official and domestic. 
With a small retinue, the Prince was established at Buckingham House in 
1781, and appeared for the first time at court. Discretion was never one of 
his talents: antagonism made contemptuous by intelligence, and congenital 
audacity led him at once into confidences and political alliances as dubious 
as they were unbecoming. George Croly, the Tory divine, said, "All princes 



are made to be plundered; and the youth, generosity and companionship of 
the Prince marked him out for special plunder." The shameless Duke of 
Cumberland, his uncle, and the Due de Chartres abetted the young man's 
behaviour, which soon became more abandoned than gay, and more vexing 
than glamorous. Who can censor him, and do so fairly? He was ardent, 
extroverted and comely, and some day he would be King. He would have 
power to exercise and patronage to bestow. Had he not responded to the 
flattery, he would have been inhuman, and human he was to a precarious 
degree. Further, his antipathy to his father, who inclined toward the Tories, 
impelled the Prince toward the Whigs, the advocates of popular rights, of 
parliamentary power over the Crown. Whiggish absentee heirs made London 
the basis of rowdy operations. The period was not, as with the Restoration, 
one in which licentiousness was officially condoned. In an age both dissolute 
and rational, immodest and dainty, the Prince's first open essay in self- 
indulgence was to throw himself at the feet of Mrs. Robinson, the "Perdita" 
of Garrick's "A Winter's Tale." She was twenty-two and luscious, and the 
untidy idyll between the actress and her 'Tlorizel" continued for about two 
years. Society, as well as his future paramours, should have been forewarned 
when the Prince jilted her and dishonored his bond of twenty thousand 
pounds. 

He came of age in 1783. Enfranchised and on the Duke of Cumberland's 
invitation, he made straight for the formerly prohibited seaside village of 
Brighton, fifty miles from London, where already Dr. Johnson had soothed 
"ventiferous humors and melancholy distempers" in the salt water and brac- 
ing air. The next year, through the offices of his German steward Weltje, 
the Prince engaged Grove House for a month's stay in July. His health 
wanted restoration: he was goiterous, fat and crapulent, an unsound com- 
bination for a full-blooded man. And he was hopelessly, helplessly in love. 

Maria Fitzherbert, twice a widow, rich, comforting and Roman, had met 
His Royal Highness at the opera, and with a susceptibility wholly operatic 
in its phrasing the Prince was infatuated forthwith. He wooed her with such 
hysteria — even feigning suicide — that the beleaguered idol was obliged to 
flee to Paris and Holland. She returned in 1785, hopeful that the delirium 
had passed, for well she knew her position would be "unhappy and un- 
tenable." The Prince was no less clamorous, and on December 21st they 
were married by a curate of the Church of England in Mrs. Fitzherbert's 
drawing-room in Park Lane. 

The step was foolhardy and commendable. A morganatic union was out 
of the question because of the King's opposition and the provisions of the 
Royal Marriage Act. The Prince was compromising his succession and 
Mrs. Fitzherbert's honor, for she could never acknowledge the marriage. 



But he loved her to distraction and she, with a probity to be shockingly used, 
loved him. For a time the royal scapegrace was steadied. He was worse than 
embarrassed, for what with race horses, Carlton House and the cost, in jewels, 
of his siege, he owed a hundred and sixty thousand pounds. A chaste life at 
Brighton was unavoidable, for London was no longer compliant, and he 
could not parade his wife there without prodigious scandal. In October, 
1786, Weltje the cook and go-between took a lease on a farmhouse, the 
property of Thomas Read Kemp, which stood in open ground on the Old 
Steine. The Duke of Cumberland's house was nearby, and Mrs. Fitzherbert 
lodged separately, for in all her life she never spent a night under her hus- 
band's roof. 

If an explanation of the Pavilion can be sought in anything but folly — 
the desperate, disarming folly of royal insubordination — we must consider 
also politics and social causes. When the Prince took his seat in the House 
of Lords in 1783, his first vote had been cast on the side of Charles James Fox 
against Pitt's India Bill, which was to set up governmental control of the 
political, military and financial operations of the British possessions in India. 
The Prince had also supported Fox's Westminster election. His candidate 
fell, and the India Bill, resisted by the Whigs as an extension of sovereign 
power, was passed. It was the beginning of Fox's political decline, and he 
carried the Prince with him into unpopularity. Fox was a perennial bankrupt 
and a rake, but he had denounced the coercion of the American colonies, he 
was a stunning orator, an indomitable advocate of liberal causes, vehement 
of temper and vividly humane. The Whigs were not alone "His Majesty's 
loyal opposition." They, and Fox especially, were the supporters of enlight- 
enment, of the ideas, not the deeds, of revolution and the integrity of man. 
It was among the Whigs that Rousseau, Mirabeau and Voltaire were read; 
it was they who appropriated republican neoclassicism and the "gothick" as 
expositions of the rationality and emotion which had been crushed by 
formalism and authority. When in 1787 rumors of the Prince's marriage 
threatened to prevent parliamentary action on his debts. Fox scotched them 
in the House of Commons — only to discover that he had been deceived. 
Money was voted, and the Prince could start his home. The architect was 
Henry Holland, a friend of Fox and designer for Whig society. Mr. Kemp's 
farmhouse was transformed into the royal pleasance in five months, and the 
Prince took possession in July, 1787. 

What is known as "Regency" style had already begun. "Regency" is a 
designation of convenience, not a limitation. It applies, not to the Regency 
proper, which lasted only nine years (1811-1820), but to the last two decades 
of the eighteenth century, and of the nineteenth, the first three. Primarily 
a period of archaeological revival, today it seems scientifically inaccurate, but 



its creators were scrupulous for their time, as well as functionalists of an 
historical kind. The contrast between Georgian and Regency style is more 
than a difference of motifs and ornamentation: it reveals a change from 
theory to individually organized practice, the basis of which was "correctness." 

"Anglo-classic" architects and designers of the Georgian era were, up to 
a point, either archaeologists, like the Brothers Adam, or belated Renaissance 
theorists, like Isaac Ware. They were, in addition, faraway and rather 
squeamish practitioners of baroque plasticity and the intimate externalism 
of the rococo. But in the late eighteenth century a contributory ferment 
enabled architects to employ new styles with a scope, daring and exemption 
from precedent that was impossible in a less tolerant age. This was indi- 
vidualism: the right of the human being, no matter what his station, gifts 
or creed, to determine within the limits of society's welfare his own way of 
life and the conduct that would make it happy. The individual, attended by 
the architect, determined what was correct. "Correctness" was not the 
Vitruvian-Palladian idea of faithfulness to abstract canons, but rather the 
codified fitness of styles to be used at different times and for different pur- 
poses. Only thus, when each past style had literary overtones determining 
its harmony with function and emotion, could the Gothick or Graecian, 
Egyptian, Turkish, Hindoo and Chinese coalesce into a consonant scheme. 
The Regency is romantic, in that the associative qualities of a style are para- 
mount. It is eclectic in that styles were copied rather than evolved. And it 
is academic in that the style chosen was studiously exploited, with devoted 
attention to authentic detail. Travel, commercial expansion, archaeology 
and the scientific attitude yielded a repertory of historic styles no architect 
had used before. 

"Taste," from fidelity to the conventional, turned to personal judgment 
and expression, and the historic, exotic styles were applied self-consciously 
to the requirements of the client. Looked at in the clean perspective of his- 
tory, the appropriateness to their function of these styles may seem far- 
fetched. But given the proposition that the client's sensibilities are to be 
expressed in plastic terms, and that these terms carry with them sentimental 
and literary references which are confirmed by both sensation and inherent 
artistic character, Sheraton's remark on the Chinese drawingroom at Carlton 
House is not inconsistent. ". . . in effect, though it may appear extravagant 
to the vulgar eye, it is but suitable to the dignity of the proprietor." 

For over a year, the Marine Pavilion, "correct and elegant" in the French 
style, was the Prince's refuge from creditors, intrigue and ceremony. Here 
he held his court, and Mrs. Fitzherbert, if she was not Princess of Wales, was 
at least Queen of Brighton. We may assume that the decor of the first Pavil- 
ion — purchased by Weltje to his personal advantage — was equally French 



in character, though it may not have been completely homogeneous. The 
Prince was fond of anything with lustre: "French blue" vases in ormolu 
mounts (No. 40), clocks by Vulliamy (No. 140), and Sevres or Paris porcelain 
(No. 45) would have decked the mantels and the royal table. There must 
always have been much gilt, for the Prince was sensuously attracted by it, 
though not like his grandfather, who counted the coins of the household 
purse one by one each night. Mythological and Egypto-classical figures (Nos. 
137, 138, 139, 145) may well have lent their convivial or stolid support to 
tapers and lamps. Silver and silver-gilt, at this time both sophisticated and 
serene (Nos. 101, 103, 105) would have spread their mirrored light (No. 75) 
behind the drawn damask curtains. 

But in November, 1788, the Prince was called precipitately to Windsor. 
His father had gone insane. Babbling and unappeasable, the King ranged 
the corridors, and when confronted by his son in the dining room, man- 
handled him. The King's life was held near an end, and the Prince, with 
startling executive capacity, took charge of the castle. It soon became ap- 
parent that a regency would have to be provided for, and a dreadful order 
of battle was drawn up between Whigs and Tories, the Queen and the Prince, 
Pitt and Fox. The Whigs contended that the Prince, by title of birth, should 
be regent with no restrictions on his power. The Tories submitted resolu- 
tions that the Prince might exercise royal powers for the most part, but with 
strict limitations, at which he fumed and grumbled. Just as the bills had 
reached the House of Lords, and Ireland was praying the Prince to assume 
the regency without obstruction, the King recovered and the Prince's chance 
of ruling was lost for another twenty-two years. He was humiliated and con- 
sumed by frustrations. His promissory notes, issued in the abundance of 
expectation, were falling due. Yet for the next four years he spent as much 
time as he could at Brighton, carefree and prodigal despite his liabilities, and 
so far as he could be, happily married. 

By 1794 his debts were gigantic: creditors walked out of Carlton House 
with furniture under their arms, and he was impotent. There was no escape 
but to acquiesce to the King, and marry: that was the sole condition on 
which his father would assist. "One damn Frau is as good as another," said 
the married man, and awaited the choice. She was Caroline of Brunswick, 
an affectionate, messy, robust ignoramus, "with good bust and impertinent 
shoulders," who on first meeting so affected her fiance that all he could do 
was quaver for a peg of brandy. But they were married, and Lady Jersey, 
his new Egeria, was installed with consummate insolence as lady-in-waiting. 
Caroline's minimal charms were no match for Lady Jersey's, and hers were 
of a transient kind. She dominated and monopolized; she even ridiculed 
(the Prince weighed two hundred and forty). Caroline's child, the Princess 



Charlotte, was bom in January, 1796, and on April 30th the Prince wrote 
her that "Our inclinations are not in our power. . . . Tranquil and com- 
fortable society is, however; ... let our intercourse, therefore, be restricted 
to that . . ." Mrs. Fitzherbert was assailed again. Calmed by an apostolic 
brief, designating her the Prince's true wife in the sight of God and the 
Church, she gave way. A new century found the Prince estranged from his 
Princess, delivered from his mistress, and reconciled to his illicit spouse. 

It is extraordinary how the shifts and enthusiasms of the Prince's taste 
changed barometrically with the climate of his circumstances. In the history 
of the Pavilion, each building stage corresponded to some alleviation of his 
formidable debts. Each ransom depended upon some concession to com- 
mand, as in the denial of his marriage to Mrs. Fitzherbert, or his deplorably 
cynical second marriage to Caroline. And as, relieved and rebellious, he 
offset interference by another round of alterations, he chose a style that, per- 
haps, typified defiance and pacified his irritations. 

"Suitable to the dignity of the proprietor." In that phrase lies the clue to 
the Regency, and to "The Prince Regent's Style." For the Whigs, the pro- 
gressives, the radicals by conviction or expedience to build in the republican 
mode, as in Holland's Brooks's Club, or the Gothick, as in Strawberry Hill 
and Fonthill Abbey, or the Chinese, as at Alton Towers, was to carry into 
effect the dual philosophy of "correctness" and allusion. But for the Prince 
of Wales mere adherence was not enough. His position enjoined luxury, and 
his peculiarities were satisfied only by the inimitable. Holland's Marine 
Pavilion of 1787 was Gallic, when this style embodied radicalism. Beginning 
in 1802, the interior was redecorated in the Chinese manner by Holland's 
pupil, P. F. Robinson. The immediate stimulus was a gift of Chinese wall- 
paper. Chinoiserie was no new fashion — the importation of cabinets, por- 
celains and textiles, to be combined with baroque or rococo mounts, had 
been going on for more than a hundred years. The wistful enchantment of 
Ming decoration, which appealed to aristocratic philosophers by its urbanity 
and frail charm, had just the poetic curiosity to brush with faerie the tempers 
of ormolu and bronze. Carlton House had a Chinese room in 1790. But the 
Pavilion was to be rebuilt, internally, from cellar to garret. Grace and Sons 
supplied the designs. These are no illusory evocations of Far Cathay. They 
reverberate with color: the effect is barbaric, as if by some perverse metem- 
psychosis Kubla Kahn had bedeviled this desultory sybarite. 

The Chinese reconstruction, conceived at the opening of the Napoleonic 
wars, is possibly another form of resistance to thwarted aspirations. In July, 
1803, the Prince petitioned the King to be permitted "to shed the last drop 
of my blood in support of your majesty's person, crown and dignity." A 
sceptic might assert that this was as calculated a bit of melodrama as the 

8 



bogus suicide. But though the Prince was impetuous, it would be cruel to 
derogate his love of country. He had written to Viscount Sidmouth, the War 
Minister, "When . . . the nature of the contest . . . was impressed on my con- 
sideration, I should indeed have been devoid of every virtuous sentiment if 
I felt no reluctance in remaining a passive spectator of armaments which 
have for their object the very existence of the British Empire." The King 
rebufiEed him with cool words: "Should the implacable enemy so far succeed 
as to land, you will have an opportunity of showing your zeal at the head of 
your regiment." He was useless, except for an invasion. So the reconstruc- 
tion went on, in a fashion so foreign, so antidomestic, so unmilitary and 
improvident it was as if the Prince were taunting patriotism. Forbidden an 
active part in the campaigns that made demigods of Nelson and Wellington, 
he seemed determined to dissociate himself, to be a Mongol khan, albeit safe, 
warm and replete behind the Channel moat. 

If the earlier Grace renderings are compared to those of the third rebuild- 
ing, two aspects of the Prince's fickle yet expanding taste can be seen. The 
interior of the Pavilion from 1802 to 1805 was another retraite royale in a 
different mode. Bamboo papers covered the walls, the furniture, of lacquer 
and bamboo (Nos. 76, 82, 86), was of Chinese origin. Chinese porcelains, 
with sensitive floral designs (Nos. 41, 43) rather than assertive single colors, 
were used, curiosities from China (Nos. 132, 134, 135) loaded the lacquer 
cabinets and stands. The furniture not Chinese was English in workmanship 
and design (Nos. 79, 80), "Regency" as we ordinarily know it, but with a 
certain exotic note. Mrs. Fitzherbert, unknowingly at the ebb of her powers, 
still contrived to simulate a home-life for her husband, whose affairs were 
submitted to strict regulation, and over the alien knick-knacks there glowed 
a feeble conjugality. But the exterior of Holland's villa was now too in- 
genuous, too deficient in romance. It had to be changed. 

From the chartering of the East India Company to the India Bill of 1784, 
little by little the fascinations of that remote subcontinent had enveloped 
the English mind. In the United States we are schooled to think of our own 
origins as Britain's first concern. They were not. The American colonies 
were a market, true. But the forested wilderness, hacked into farms by dis- 
senters and sectaries, was a paltry dominion beside the ramparts of Golconda 
and the spices of Bengal. Of what importance was a waste of slatternly sav- 
ages who wrote with knots, compared with the fountain of Sanskrit poetry 
and the intellectual texture of Hindu metaphysics? What seduction could 
the New World offer against Futehpore-Sikri and Agra, Delhi and Kashmir, 
against jungles and elephants, emeralds and gold? "All princes are made to 
be plundered"; our Prince began to plunder the most princely of territories. 



Symptomatically, the "Indian dream" at Brighton did not set in with the 
Pavilion. The Prince's stables, long a source of contention with his father, 
were so large by 1803 they had to be given new quarters. William Porden 
(1755-1822), a pupil of James Wyatt and Samuel Pepys Cockerell, was com- 
missioned. He chose as his model the Halle au Ble, the Paris Com Market 
of 1782, giving the building a stupendous central dome. The style was 
Mogul, and the selection of so irrelevant a fashion furnishes a piquant glimpse 
of the Prince's mind and associates. The most graphic panorama of Indian 
scenery and architecture was Thomas and William Daniell's "Views of 
Oriental Scenery," issued from 1795 to 1808 (No. 36). The Daniells, father 
and son, had voyaged to India in 1784, the eighteen-year-old boy recording 
his impressions in aquatints of meticulous accuracy. At Sezincote in Glouces- 
tershire lived Sir Charles Cockerell, whose brother, Samuel Pepys Cocker- 
ell, was Surveyor to the East India Company and architect of this mansion, 
the focus of the Indian movement in England. Thomas Daniell designed the 
architectural features of the garden, and Humphry Repton, who later created 
the design of the Pavilion, landscaped the grounds. The Prince had visited 
Sezincote while it was still in process of construction; here he must have 
been put in touch with Porden. Can we say that some wayward drollery 
occurred to the royal racer? Here was a style belonging to nabobs, sultans 
and rajahs in the country whose exploitation by the government had been 
the issue of his first political defeat. To house the royal stud in an Indian 
palace — what a jape! We shall never know. But ... it may have been. 
Though the interior of the Pavilion continued Chinese, the Indian style had 
gripped the Prince's imagination. 

In 1805, while Repton was at Sezincote and the stables were yet unfinished, 
the designer was commanded by the Prince "That I should deliver my opin- 
ion concerning what Style of Architecture would be most suitable for the 
Pavilion," which "was deemed by everybody too small to admit of any im- 
provements. . . ." The custom is to credit Repton with persuading the Prince 
to an Indian exterior. Knowing his patron's new enthusiasm, surely the 
recommendation was only opportune. But with praiseworthy solicitude, he 
weighed the possibilities. "I found in the gardens of the Pavilion a stu- 
pendous and magnificent Building, which . . . does credit both to the genius 
of the Artist, and the good taste of his Royal Employer. Although the outline 
of the Dome resembles rather a Turkish Mosque than the Buildings of 
Hindustan, yet its general character is distinct from either Grecian or Gothic, 
and must both please and surprise everyone not bigotted to the forms of 
either." As to the new Pavilion, ". . . neither the Grecian nor the Gothic 
style could be made to assimilate with what had so much the character of 
an Eastern building. I considered all the different styles of different coun- 

10 



tries, from a conviction of the danger of attempting to invent anything 
entirely new. The Turkish was objectionable, as being a corruption of the 
Grecian; the Moorish as a bad model of the Gothic; the Egyptian was too 
cumbrous for the character of a villa; the Chinese too light and trifling for 
the outside, however it may be applied to the interior. . . . Thus, if any 
known style were to be adopted, no alternative remained, but to combine 
from the Architecture of Hindustan such forms as might be rendered appli- 
cable to the purpose." The Prince wrote of the drawings, "I consider the 
whole of this work as perfect, and will have my part carried into immediate 
execution; not a tittle shall be altered — even you yourself shall not admit 
any improvement." Repton's "Designs for the Pavilion at Brighton" (No. 
37) were published in 1808. And the Prince was out of money again. 

The interval between 1806 and 1811 is relatively vacant. Mrs. Fitzherbert 
was being undermined by Lady Hertford, wife of the third Marquess of 
Hertford, whose collections, with those of his son, are now the Wallace 
Collection at Hertford House. The connection was undoubtedly platonic, 
though it caused Mrs. Fitzherbert great anguish; now she was championed by 
the King and Queen, a risky way, as she should have known, to keep her 
husband's regard. The Napoleonic wars were the main preoccupation of the 
British ministers and the British people. The Prince was aloof: he had been 
insulted enough, and the people despised him. Caroline of Brunswick had 
become the center of scandalous charges; she was investigated, acquitted, and 
cautioned — a procedure which seemed to the people gratuitously intolerable 
as long as her husband lived the way he did. In October, 1810, the King 
again became deranged, and Spencer Perceval, the Prime Minister, was 
determined that the original restrictions on a regency should be revived. 
Through the morbid oscillations of the King's illness the Prince was sly and 
evasive: power he would play for, but cannily and in good time. The King 
remaining unimproved, the Regency Bill passed in January, 1811, and the 
forty-eight-year-old Prince, agreeing to some restrictions and to the con- 
tinuance of his father's ministers in office, became ruler in name and act at 
last. As if to seal his independence, he gave a banquet at Carlton House, at 
which Mrs. Fitzherbert, though invited, was to be seated according to her 
rank. "You know. Madam," said the Regent, "you have no place," and with 
that final cut the honest, victimized woman retired to Brighton, never to 
enter the Pavilion until the reign of William IV. Her villa, mutatis mutandis, 
is now the local Y.M.C.A. 

The Regency was definitely established, with a change of ministers, in 
1812, and the Prince Regent had access to funds. The Pavilion was due for 
another mood. Ruler of England he was now: should he not look homeward 
to the abbeys and spires? James Wyatt, arch-priest of the Gothic Revival, 

11 



was asked to draw up a scheme, and then died in an accident in 1813. The 
Regent eventually appointed John Nash, the designer of Regent's Park and 
Regent Street, who had been not unconnected with the investigation of 
Caroline. Nash, a congenial windbag but a genius, reverted to Repton's 
Indian design, on account of the overwhelming presence of the stables, and 
the tantalizing opportunity to surpass Repton and contrive a superlatively 
"picturesque" effect, a romance unique and unalterable. Perhaps too the 
India Bill of 1813, which gave the government control over the East India 
Company's commercial transactions, and abolished its monopoly of trade, 
served to remind the Prince of his old partiality. The first revisions were 
finished in 1818, the year of Repton's death. Repton, another rejected 
servant, wrote of "the time and contrivance wasted to produce plans although 
highly approved; yet . .. . not infrequently thrown aside, and plans more 
expensive adopted in their stead." Poor dupe, he should have known what 
to expect. 

The Prince Regent, even while commissioning new decorations, had other 
interests. His mother's death, in 1818, brought him Buckingham House, and 
this was to be reconstructed as the royal abode. George III died on the 29th 
of January, 1 820, and kingly duties were thereafter his task. He was resolved, 
on any pretext, to divorce Caroline, and the wretched woman, who had lived 
on the Continent since 1814, arrived in England on the 4th of June. A month 
later a bill of divorcement on grounds of adultery was introduced in the 
House of Lords; the trial lasted until November, when charges were aban- 
doned. George IV was crowned July 19th, 1821. His frantic Queen, barred 
from the coronation, at last liberated the monarch by her death a month later. 

With the political Regency, not only does "The Prince Regent's Style" 
reach its zenith, but Regency style as historically conceived begins to dis- 
integrate. The drawback of Thomas Hope's Roman functionalism, to the 
popular mind, was its purity, which did not allow expression. "Correctness" 
and individualism thus led to want of uniformity: antithetical motifs were 
combined for novelty's sake, and the onset of the Victorian mechanical com- 
posite was at hand. 

But the Prince Regent and King was saved by the acumen of his caprice. 
As if to celebrate the ultimate in self-expression, to finish youthful defiance 
in one final tantrum before settling down to reign, the interior alterations 
of 1815-1818 became a kind of stampede that overrode the previous schemes 
with violent hooves. There was something almost merciless in these decora- 
tions (Figs. 1, 2). Dragons and griffons (Nos. 142, 152, 153) coiled and 
snarled from cornices and out of the flames of the fireplaces. False vistas 
into rose-clouded skies opened up the ceilings. Figures in niches (No. 170) 
gazed at the festivities and the Marchioness of Conyngham, who was hostess 

12 









Fic. 1. Proposed Des.'cn for the West Wall of the Music Room; watercolor. 1818-lSl!) 
By Frederick Grace (1779-1859) : for the Royal Pavilion, Brighton 
The Cooper Union Museinii 




Fic. 2. Design for the West Wall of the Music Room; watercolor, 1818-1819 
By Frederick Grace (1779-1859) ; for the Royal Pavilion, Brighton 
The Cooper Union Museum 




Fir. 3. Pair of Doorstops; gilded metal 
England, lSlO-1830 
Lent bv H. Blaiiman and Sons. Ltd. 







Fig. 4. Design for A W.\ll in the Yellow (North) Drawing Room; watercolor, 1818-1819 
By Frederick Grace (1779-1859) ; for the Royal Pavilion, Brighton 
The Cooper Union Museum 



PkJUswa 


-T— r- 


I 


-— ^ 


-r 


--a^ 


1 


~-ju~- 


1 




1 _ 


^.,., ^^^ ^- -, 




1 


«.4i_ 


1 




i 


-^u- 


i 




T ' 


T 


"-Tf— 


r 




T 


. — =^ft^-„ 


_J^ 




7 


ip«7r«- 


:i:„:_ 


T 


-'irr- 


1-- 


*-T^ 


""""" 


— ^1^^— 


T 


•—T— 


I 


p.^- — 


K 1, 


i 


»Ju— 


"T- 


^i^a^u. 


1 


^u- 


X 


— ju — 


1 


P-JU. — 


■i :, 


"T- 


»«sU-. 


— T — 




1 


— .-J;^. 


■■t 

J. 




1 ^' 


*"7s " 


T " 


T 


-»yv— 


T 


-—Pt, — 


r 




r 




T 


IP^W''**"'' 


I I'" 


J 




r 




J 


-•T^— 


J 




r 


- ' "''■'' ■ 










''^ 




•"" 


- 







W w 1 I'M'Ik; double IjokIc r, l);iinl)Oo pallcrn 

Probably designed by Frederick Grace (1779-1859) ; for the Royal Paxilion. Brighion 

The Cooper Union Museum 



Fig. 6. 1'roi'Osi u Dfmgn for the Chinese G^ller\ , wateicolor, 1815-1819 
B\ Fiedciick Cidce (1779-1859) ; foi the Royal Pa\ilion, Brighton 
The Coopei Union Museum 




Fk.. 1 1. 1)1 ssiKi I'l.ATi.: lead ^iass, fiee-ljlown and cut 
England, London, about 1821 
Lent by the Corning Museum o( Glass 




Imc. 12. Dkacon Coticii; carved and gilded wood 
England, about 1820 
Lent by Mrs. S^rie Maugham 




Glazed CoTrox Chimv; chiiioiseiie molil 

England, IKlO-1820 

The Cooper Union Museum 




Fig. 14. Design for an Alcove; watercolor, 1815-1822 

By Frederick Grace (1779-1859) ; for the Royal Pavilion, Brighton 
The Cooper Union Museum 




Fir:. 13. Ckm i ki'II ( i ; viUcr 

By I'aiil .Siovi (1771-1.S41) ; F.ngland, London, 1814 
Lent In S. [. .Slirubsole 



now. Gilt china (No. 59), gilt furniture, prisms and lustres falling from 
gilt standards scintillated, not in the gentle light of candles, but the white 
radiance of gas. From the window cornices silk draperies of fervent crimson 
fell to the carpeted floor. Lighting was massive (Fig. 15, No. 110): eight 
candelabra for the Banqueting Room cost five thousand pounds, and the 
great chandelier was more. Strange clocks (No. 133), thermometers, and 
weather gauges were everywhere. When a piece took the ruler's eye as a 
work that by its brilliance could hold its own in his Asiatic rhapsody, he 
purchased it, whether it might be bouUe or ivory (No. 74), Louis XVI or 
Benares ware. 

Between 1821 and 1824, the Pavilion saw its brightest years. The interior 
decorations were completed, the domes and minarets of the exterior sparkled 
and shone. The King was sixty, monarch at last, free of his family and his 
pestering encumbrances. He had responsibilities: his father's library of a 
hundred and twenty thousand volumes he gave to the nation, and after 
Christmas, 1 824, returned to Windsor and the burgeoning pomp of Bucking- 
ham Palace. "The Prince Regent's Style" was near its end, for the Pavilion, 
traduced and satirized, had served its purpose. It was the only home the 
Prince could call truly his: French, Chinese and Indian, it was the sole 
habitation that did not bear memories of parental supremacy, dynastic obli- 
gation, and the powers and privileges that were somehow never his. Here 
he had a hearth, a toy with which he realized his fanciful impulses. And the 
style of the man and this singular building, that rests among the trees with 
the monstrous ethereality of a deformed butterfly, this Xanadu on the 
South Downs? 

Out of the profusion, the overflow of affluence, came an aesthetic, the 
aesthetic of an individuality surrounded by his own taste and assisted by 
original professionals. The Prince Regent's tropical imagination lifted 
chinoiserie and the splendour of riches out of the supplemental and made 
them a principle. What rescues the silver of Paul Storr (Fig. 15, Nos. 107, 
126, 157), the dragon couches (Fig. 12, No. 87), the mirrors (No. 83) and 
voluptuous trifles (Nos. 104, 116, 119, 120, 121) from vulgarity is the fastidi- 
ousness in regard to quality that was this royal builder's most royal trait. 
What structures might have covered England had he enjoyed raw power 
over men and materials, like Peter the Great, or the sacred will of Louis XIV, 
we can only speculate. No such prerogatives were his, even when King. 
Ambition, personal and architectural, was always inhibited by lack of funds, 
by constitutional obstacles, and by his own spasmodic liberalism. The role 
of a monarch was henceforward that of a paragon, not a prodigy. 

Thackeray, the prig, sanctified the disapproval when he wrote of the fourth 
George, "I try and take him to pieces, and find silk stockings, padding, stays 

13 



... a star and blue ribbon . . . one of Truefitt's best nutty-brown wigs reeking 
with oil, a set o£ teeth and a huge black stock, under-waistcoats, more under- 
waistcoats, and then nothing. . . . He must have had an individuality: the 
dancing-master whom he emulated, nay, surpassed, the wig-maker who curled 
his toupee for him, the tailor who cut his coats, had that. But, about George, 
one can get at nothing actual." 

How purblind and patronizing those words are! Were they true, would 
England restore to the Pavilion every summer a part of its gaiety and splen- 
dor? Would the palms and dragons, the mustard yellows and crimsons which 
reflect the sanguine disposition of that impatient man give refreshment and 
zest to dwellers in service flats and suburban developments? Would the art 
of interior decoration, which at its best is the exposition of personality in 
one's surroundings, turn back so eagerly to the daydream of that volatile 
sanctuary by the sea? 

"The Prince Regent's Style" may serve as a memorial to the validity of 
uniform recklessness, to the gallantry that lies in folly that is heartfelt, and 
to the goodness of unwisdom, when unwisdom declares a holiday from ex- 
pressionless duty, and leads us toward a distant kingdom where wish and 
self are one. 

Everett P. Lesley, Jr. and William Osmun 



For the Royal Pavilion by Frederick Grace {1779-1859) 

T 

It HF INSPIRATION for the present exhibition is centered about a group of 
thirty-two designs for the interiors of the Royal Pavilion at Brighton, which 
the Museum now displays for the first time. They are a portion of a larger 
group of drawings acquired by the Museum in 1948. These drawings, 
originally contained in a series of folios, scrapbooks, and albums, comprise 
a cross-section of the work of the Grace family of English decorators, cover- 
ing a period of about one hundred years of activity. 

The designs, of which seventy-eight have been related to the Pavilion 
decorations, are important, not only for the special historical connections 
involved, but also because of the rather intimate insight they afford for the 
unfolding of design ideas in an exotic style by a firm of decorators during 
the actual planning and execution of what they must have considered their 
most important single commission. 

14 



The drawings fill a vital gap in our knowledge of the activities at the 
Pavilion during the several phases of its later development before it was 
finally resolved into that form now preserved best for us in the series of 
engravings and aquatints prepared by John Nash to commemorate the 
achievement. They also fill in the pictorial void in the evolution of a col- 
laborative production known heretofore only through the careful records of 
expenditures and other related documents housed in various British archives, 
as well as in the accounts of the Grace establishment. 

The firm of John Grace and Sons had executed commissions at the Pavilion 
as early as 1788, but were more actively occupied there between 1802 and 
1804, when they supplied many articles of Chinese importation — furniture, 
porcelain, costumes, banners, models of Ghinese junks, even Ghinese tobacco 
and a Ghinese razor! John Grace's son, Frederick, aged twenty-three in 1802, 
supervised much of the decoration at that time. From 1804 until 1815, dur- 
ing a period of comparative inactivity at the Pavilion, the Graces were 
occupied elsewhere. Their return dates from the time of the extensive 
remodeling of the structure under Nash, begun in 1815. The Museum's 
drawings reflect, for the most part, the work on the interiors from that date 
until the completion of the decoration in 1822. 

This later phase of the activity of Grace and Sons was principally the 
responsibility of Frederick Grace and can be dated between October 1815 
and October 1822. He was concerned with the decoration of most of the 
rooms on the ground floor: The Music Room, the Ghinese Gallery, the 
South (Blue) Drawing-room, as well as portions of the Saloon, the Entrance 
Hall, the King's Apartments, and undoubtedly included work on the upper 
floor. 

The name of a second decorator, Robert Jones, is also significant in any 
consideration of the activity at the Pavilion during the new alterations and 
extensions. He was associated with Grace from 1817 to 1822, and the decora- 
tion of the Banqueting Room, the North (Yellow) Drawing-room, and sec- 
tions of the Saloon, Entrance Hall, and the King's Apartments are attributed 
to his genius. 

There seems certainly to have been a clearly understood definition of 
responsibilities by Grace and Jones and, although it is more than conceivable 
that they collaborated frequently during various aspects of the work in hand, 
both men were evidently on an equal footing and were paid separately. 

Above all, the active personal interest of the Prince Regent in his "marine 
residence" overshadowed and influenced every detail of the work created 
there. From the beginning the decorative problem stimulated him. He was 
not to be satisfied any longer with the mere impression of the Ghinese taste, 
as he had been earlier, both in the Ghinese drawing-room at Garlton House, 

15 



completed by 1790, and at the Pavilion in 1803. Now he sought to have 
created, in terms of the trend toward the romantic and picturesque, more 
splendid and richer effects which would be completely personal and indi- 
vidualistic in their expression. To attain this end he consciously sought out 
those architects and designers who he believed could most easily free them- 
selves of academic restraints. Humphry Repton's arguments, published in 
1808, advocating the employment of designs of an Indian character for the 
Pavilion, certainly had their influence on the ideas eventually followed in 
the final schemes for the exterior. It is very probably true that only a lack 
of funds prevented the Prince from carrying out the Repton suggestions at 
that time. In 1812, when the Prince as Regent was once again able to afford 
further work on his favorite project, it is more than likely that he now 
hesitated before the formalism that restricted Repton, appointing James 
Wyatt (1746-1813) his Surveyor-General. Upon Wyatt's sudden death, he 
was succeeded by John Nash (1752-1835) who thus entered on the scene 
before any commitments had been made that might have inhibited his 
grandiose ideas. 

In Frederick Grace and Robert Jones, the Prince Regent found as well a 
freedom entirely in accord with his own, and the Pavilion drawings appear 
to bear this out eloquently. To the Prince, as a kind of impresario, it was 
essential that in his choice of architect and decorators he discover abilities 
sympathetic enough to understand and bring into being those ideas which 
had so captured his imagination. 

Of the Cooper Union Museum drawings, the larger number is rendered 
in watercolor, and a smaller group in pencil. In execution at least two dis- 
tinctive hands can be recognized: one, an artist, whom we shall name Anony- 
mous Designer I, exhibits a sensitive draughtsmanship, delicate and refined 
in the use of his media, and much taken up with a delight in small and very 
intricate detail, creating a rich fabric woven of motifs of Ghinese, Indian, 
and Moorish suggestion. Along with this interest in detail, however, the 
definition of the wall space is always considered and respected, and no attempt 
ever made to alter the existing structure. The recurrent symmetrical arrange- 
ments of doors flanking mantelpiece are always adhered to, the designs more 
often accentuating rather than limiting or disguising the effect. 

The other artist, to be designated here as our Anonymous Designer II, is 
much less interested in skillful rendering techniques and precise detail, but 
somewhat more concerned with unusual effects of texture and color, with a 
tendency toward the use of marbleized surfaces and trellis-work patterns in 
gay abandon. Motifs borrowed from the Orient are adapted to his own needs 
in a completely free and unusual manner, creating an entirely individual 
style. Problems of false perspective especially attract him. By this means, 

16 



and counteracting the more conservative approach of his colleague, he alters 
his wall surfaces constantly to achieve asymmetrical effects, or employs vari- 
ous painter's tricks of illusion more effectively to reduce the restraints pre- 
sented by the solid material of the structure. 

How far Frederick Grace's direct influence can be indicated, or whether 
he can be identified with either of these designer-draughtsmen, are still open 
questions. It is more probable that these designs present us with varying 
solutions by at least two artists working under his supervision. 

The most impressive series of the Grace designs — certainly the most daz- 
zling — are the seven drawings intended for the decoration of the Music Room 
of the Pavilion. They include the projects which were executed by 1822, 
showing the panels of Ghinese scenes designed by Grace and carried out by 
Lambelet. By our Designer I, the drawings reveal in all their original fresh- 
ness the idea of a legendary Ghina, as first presented to the eyes of the Prince 
Regent for his approval. The crimsons and yellows of the panels, the blue- 
greens of the backgrounds, and the lilac-colored dadoes, all combine for the 
richness of the effect. These designs (Fig. 2, No. 5) were closely adhered to 
in the room as executed, with the exception of the mantelpiece and other 
details. 

There is an elevation for the north wall, (No. 3), as executed, with the 
organ in situ (constructed and installed by Lincoln in 1818); designs for the 
south wall, (Nos. 4, 7) as completed; and three schemes for the east wall with 
suggestions for window treatments, the design on exhibition displaying 
fluted and festooned drapery in light blue, pink, and yellow, held in place 
by writhing serpents (No. 10). Some idea of the brilliant impression created 
in terms of the color and design detail of the Music Room wall decoration is 
conveyed perhaps by the reproduction of a portion of the north wall (No. 6) 
on the cover of this catalogue. 

Of special interest are the proposed schemes for the walls of this room, 
(Fig. 1, Nos. 7, 8, 9), by the same hand, revealing the love of small-scale detail 
so typical of this artist's style. Although less startling, and slightly more 
formal than the accepted designs, there is a harmony of pattern and color in 
them that would make a decision between the two projects difficult from 
our standpoint. 

The marble and ormolu mantelpiece (Nos. 26, 27) for the Music Room, 
now in the Ghinese Dining Room at Buckingham Palace, designed by Robert 
Jones and carried out by Sir Richard Westmacott (1775-1856) and Benjamin 
Lewis Vulliamy (1780-1854), is represented by two drawings — one intimately 
related to the accepted scheme. In this instance Jones was working for Grace 
and was probably paid directly by him for this particular design. 

The Gorridor, or Ghinese Gallery, (No. 1), was one of the first alterations 

17 



made by Nash in 1815, and was completed, together with the cast-iron stair- 
cases at each end, in that year. Frederick Grace's composition shows the 
Gallery in perspective with its enframement of trellis-work, presenting the 
design of a section of the coved ceiling with an oblong stained glass panel 
against a pink background. The niches of the Gallery, with their oft- 
described mandarin figures in place, are rendered in pencil outline. This 
drawing by Designer I was closely followed in the area as executed. A pro- 
posed design for the same section (Fig. 6, No. 2) in the hand and manner of 
Designer II, replaces the coved section of the ceiling with a projecting 
gallery supported on columns. In this design — one of great charm and 
decided originality — we see again the artist's "signature" in his liberal use 
of trellis-work, and tablets with "Chinese" characters. 

A design proposed for the Entrance Hall (No. 18), also by Designer II, 
exhibits a wall elevation with doorways flanking a large central composition 
of a framed opening revealing a painted sky, with foreground foliage. A 
somewhat smaller opening, also with sky indications, is placed high above the 
left doorway, breaking the symmetry of the construction. The walls them- 
selves are painted in imitation of stonework, and the stone frame of the 
central opening, with its indication of cast shadows, add to the unusual 
illusionistic effect. 

A design for a wall of the Yellow (North) Drawing-room (Fig. 4, No. 11), 
dating about 1817-1818, gives us a lively impression of the decoration as 
executed — a decoration which was completely altered in 1821. The drawing 
represents a series of framed pictures in the Chinese style, combined with 
various embellishments of banners, dragons, and birds, set against a vivid 
yellow background. The painted Chinese fret railing in lilac, with its series 
of Chinese dogs, and the gay cornice design, complete the scheme. Very 
probably by our Designer I, this drawing is one of the very few representa- 
tions in color of this phase of the decoration for this room, the engraving in 
the Nash volume being reproduced in outline only. 

The seemingly endless panorama of Pavilion designs which issued from the 
hands of Frederick Grace and his assistants deserves further study. A portion 
of the drawings are ideas proposed for sections of the Pavilion as yet un- 
identified; and it is hoped that future research will uncover clues to the 
names of our anonymous designers. In any event, the series of drawings in 
this collection, a monument to a great decorating house, afford us a pro- 
vocative pictorial impression of the activity at the Pavilion during its most 
energetic phase of princely inspiration. 

E. Maurice Block 



IS 



{The numbers set in parentheses after the descriptions of the objects refer to the owners 
of the objects, as shown in the list of Contributors to the Exhibition on page 24.) 



DESIGNS FOR THE ROYAL PAVILION 

1. Acc. no. 1948-40-5. Design for the Chinese 
Gallery; 1815-1818, altered 1822 (4) 

2. Acc. no. 1948-40-6. Proposed design for the 
Chinese Gallery; 1815-1819 (4) 

3. Acc. no. 1948-40-7. Design for the north 
wall of the Music Room; 1818-1819; exe- 
cuted, with slight differences in detail, in 
1822 (4) 

4. Acc. no. 1948-40-8. Design tor the south 
wall of the Music Room; 1818-1819; exe- 
cuted 1822 (4) 

5. Acc. no. 1948-40-9 A, B. Design for the west 
wall of the Music Room; 1818-1819; exe- 
cuted 1822 (4) 

6. Acc. no. 1948-40-10. Design for a portion of 
the north wall of the Music Room; 1818- 
1819, executed 1822 (4) 

7. Acc. no. 1948-40-11. Proposed design for the 
south wall of the Music Room; 1818-1819; 
not executed (4) 

8. Acc. no. 1948-40-13. Proposed design for the 
west wall of the Music Room; 1818-1819; 
not executed (4) 

9. Acc. no. 1948-40-14. Proposed design for the 
west wall of the Music Room; 1818-1819; 
not executed (4) 

10. Acc. no. 1948-40-15. Decoration for the east 
wall of the Music Room; 1818-1819; not 
executed (4) 

11. Acc. no. 1948-40-18. Design tor a wall in 
the Yellow (North) Drawing Room; 1817- 
1818, executed 1818-1819 (4) 

12. Acc. no. 1948-40-25 A, B. Design for the 
decoration of the Saloon; about 1817-1818, 
executed about 1817-1818 (4) 

13. Acc. no. 1948-40-26. Design for an alcove; 
1815-1822 (4) 

14. Acc. no. 1948-40-27. Proposed design for 
the Banqueting Room; 1815-1822; not exe- 
cuted (4) 

15. Acc. no. 1948-40-29. Design for wall decora- 
tion; 1815-1822; probably not executed (4) 

16. Acc. no. 1948-40-33. Design for wall decora- 
tion; 1815-1822; not executed (4) 

17. Acc. no. 1948-40-34. Design for wall decora- 
tion; 1815-1822; not executed (4) 

18. Acc. no. 1948-40-38. Proposed design for 
the Entrance Hall; 1815-1822; not exe- 
cuted (4) 

19. Acc. no. 1948-40-52. Design for an interior; 
1815-1822; not executed (4) 

20. Acc. nos. 1948-40-53, 54, 55. Three designs 
for wall decorations; 1815-1822 (4) 

21. Acc. no. 1948-40-63. Design for wall decora- 
tion; 1815-1822 (4) 

22. Acc. no. 1948-40-64. Design for wall decora- 
tion; 1815-1822 (4) 

23. Acc. no. 1948-40-65. Design for wall decora- 
tion; 1815-1822; probably not executed (4) 



24. Acc. no. 1948-40-67. Design tor a window 
alcove; 1815-1822; not executed (4) 

25. Acc. no. 1948-40-71. Design for a ceiling 
decoration, probably tor the Entrance Hall; 
1815-1822; probably not executed (4) 

26. Acc. no. 1948-40-73. Design tor the mantel- 
piece in the Music Room; 1818-1819; exe- 
cuted, with slight alterations, by Sir Richard 
Westmacott and B. L. Vulliamy (4) 

27. Acc. no. 1948-40-74. Design for the mantel- 
piece on the west side of the Music Room; 
1818-1819; executed, with slight alterations, 
by Sir Richard Westmacott and B. L. 
Vulliamy (4) 

28. Acc. no. 1948-40-75. Design for a vase on a 
pedestal; 1815-1822; now in the Chinese 
Dining Room, Buckingham Palace (4) 

29. Acc. no. 1948-40-89. Design tor a glass panel 
for the coved ceiling of the Music Room; 
1818-1819 (4) 

30. Acc. no. 1948-40-90. Design for a fabric, 
probably for a floor covering; 1815-1822; 
not executed (4) 

DRAWING, PRINTS AND BOOKS 

31. Drawing, watercolor; "House of Frederick 
Grace & Son, 14 Wigmore Street, Cavendish 
Square," by Thomas Hosmer Shepherd 
(active 1817-1840); England, London, about 
1827-1840 (4) 

32. Engraving; Pass-ticket to Westminster Ab- 
bey for the Coronation of George IV; Eng- 
land, London, 1820 (4) 

33. Engraving; Pass-ticket for the procession. 
Coronation of George IV; England, Lon- 
don, 1820 (4) 

34. Etching; "The Royal Pavilion, Brighton: 
Steine view, east front," by John Bruce; 
England, about 1830 (4) 

35. Etching, aquatint; "The Royal Pavilion, 
Brighton: east front," by Thomas Suther- 
land (born about 1785); England, 1821 (4) 

36. Two etchings, aquatints, from "Oriental 
Scenery . . . from the drawings of Thomas 
Daniell" (1749-1840), England, London, 
1795-1810: "The Chalees Satoon in the Fort 
of Allahabad on the River Jumna," and 
"The Jummah Musjed, Delhi" (4) 

37. Book, "Designs for the Pavilion at Brighton 
... by H. Repton" (1752-1818), England, 
London, 1808 (4) 

38. Book, "Illustrations of Her Majesty's Palace 
at Brighton . . . executed . . . under the 
superintendance of John Nash, Esq., Archi- 
tect," by Edward Wedlake Brayley, Eng- 
land, London, 1838 (4) 

MINIATURE 

39. "The Prince Regent"; oil on porcelain; by 
Henry Bone (1755-1834) after Sir Thomas 
Lawrence; England, March, 1816 (25) 

19 



CERAMICS 

40. Garniture of three vases; porcelain and 
gilt bronze; China and France; period of 
K'ang-hsi (1654-1722) and Louis XV (1715- 
1774) (6) 

41. Flower bowl; porcelain and ormolu; China 
and France; period of K'ang-hsi (1654-1722) 
and Louis XV (1715-1774) (11) 

42. Pair of vases; porcelain and ormolu; China 
and France; period of K'ang-hsi (1654-1722) 
and Louis XV (1715-1774) (11) 

43. Bowl; porcelain and ormolu; China and 
France; period of K'ang-hsi (1654-1722) and 
Louis XV (1715-1774) (11) 

44. Plate; earthenware; England, Davenport; 
about 1800 (31) 

45. Seven pieces of a dinner service; porcelain; 
Stone, Coquerell et Le Gros; France, Paris; 
about 1800 (37) 

46. Garniture of three vases; porcelain; Eng- 
land, Derby; about 1805 (37) 

47. Plate; porcelain; Barr, Flight and Barr; 
England, Worcester; 1807-1813 (12) 

48. Pair of candlesticks; porcelain; Barr, Flight 
and Barr; England, Worcester; 1807-1813 
(18) 

49. Pair of triple spill vases; porcelain; Barr, 
Flight and Barr; England, Worcester; about 
1807-1813 (18) 

50. Three pieces of a dessert service; porcelain; 
Barr, Flight and Barr; England, Worcester; 
1807-1813 (27) 

51. Pair of plates; porcelain; Barr, Flight and 
Barr; England, Worcester; 1807-1813 (30) 

52. Pair of lassies and stands; porcelain; Spode; 
England, Stoke-upon-Trent; about 1810 
(18) 

53. Obelisk garniture; white earthenware; Eng- 
land, Leeds; about 1810 (19) 

54. Pair of plates; earthenware; England, New- 
castle; about 1810 (21) 

55. Three pieces of a table service; "moonlight 
lustre" porcelain; Wedgwood; England, 
Etruria; about 1810 (21) 

56. Pair of vases; porcelain; England, Derby; 
about 1810 (21) 

57. Pair of jardinieres on stands; porcelain; 
England, Worcester; 1810-1820 (30) 

58. Four pieces of a dessert service; porcelain; 
Chamberlain; England, Worcester; about 
1810 (37) 

59. Cabaret set; porcelain, with decoration by 
G. J. J. van Os (1782-1861); France, Sevres; 
1811-1812(37) 

60. Vase; porcelain; Chamberlain; England, 
Worcester; about 1815 (32) 

61. Vase with cover; porcelain; Bloor; Eng- 
land, Derby; about 1820 (7) 

62. Pair of perfume bottles; porcelain; France; 
about 1820 (36) 

63. Garniture of three spill vases; porcelain; 
Spode; England, Stoke-upon-Trent; about 
1820 (37) 

64. Sugar bowl and plate; porcelain; Bloor; 
England, Derby; about 1825 (25) 

20 



65. Plate; porcelain; Bloor; England, Derby; 
about 1825 (25) 

66. Set of four vases; porcelain; China, prob- 
ably period of Chia Ch'ing, about 1820, or 
Tao-Kwang, about 1825 (15) 

67. Vase with cover; porcelain; England; 1800- 
1830 (17) 

68. Nine pieces of a coffee service; porcelain; 
Spode; England, Stoke-upon-Trent; 1810- 
1830 (25) 

69. Four pieces of a dessert service; porcelain; 
Chamberlain; England, Worcester; about 
1810 (37) 

70. Pair of bell pulls; earthenware; Wedg- 
wood; England, Etruria; about 1810-1815 
(25) 

71. Cup and saucer; porcelain; Flight, Barr 
and Barr; England, Worcester; 1813-1840 
(25) 

72. Dish; porcelain; Bloor; England, Wor- 
cester; 1815-1830 (25) 

FURNITURE 

73. Cabinet in the form of a hexagonal pa- 
goda; wood and painted glass; Italy, Venice; 
late 18th century (35) 

74. Chair; sandalwood veneered with incised 
ivory; India, Madras; about 1770; given to 
Queen Charlotte by George III in 1781, 
one of a set formerly in the Brighton Pa- 
vilion (29) 

75. Pair of mirrors; gilded and lacquered wood 
with crystal studding; England; about 1790 
(30) 

76. Pair of pole screens; iron, brass and lac- 
quered wood; England; about 1800 (11) 

77. Pair of blackamoor torcheres; papier-mSch^, 
wood and gesso with gilt and polychrome 
finish; England; about 1800 (30) 

78. Table; gilt and lacquered wood and por- 
celain; China, probably Canton, and Eng- 
land; about 1800 (36) 

79. Pair of banquettes; wood; England; about 
1800 (38) 

80. Side table; rosewood with enamel insets, 
columnar supports in imitation patined 
bronze finish; England; 1800-1810 (7) 

81. Couch; lacquered and painted wood and 
cane; England; about 1810 (8) 

82. Pair of chairs; painted wood imitating 
bamboo; England; about 1810 (11) 

83. Overmantel; gilded wood and gesso, with 
inserted painting, probably French; Eng- 
land; about 1800-1810(11) 

84. Chair; mahogony and brass; England; 
about 1810(36) 

85. Pair of bedposts; painted wood imitating 
bamboo; England; about 1810 (38) 

86. Chair; bamboo and cane; England; about 
1810 (38) 

87. Couch; carved and gilded wood, with drag- 
on's head; England; about 1820 (22) 

88. Window cornice with pagoda top; black 
and gold lacquered wood; England; 1810- 
1820 (38) 

89. Dressing stand with mirror; satinwood and 
ivory; marked on the back, "G. R. Pavil- 
ion"; England; 1820-1825 (17) 



90. Circular tilt-top table; wood, papier-mScW 
and mother-of-pearl; England; 1820-1830 

(7) 

91. Pair of garden chairs; terracotta; England; 
1800-1830 (38) 

GLASS 

92. Butter dish or cooler; lead glass, free-blown 
and cut; Ireland; about 1815 (5) 

93. Port wineglass; lead glass, free-blown, cut 
and engraved; Apsley Pellatt, Falcon Glass 
Works; England, London, Southwark; 
about 1820; one of a set made for the Prince 
of Wales (5) 

94. Dessert plate; lead glass, free-blown and 
cut, with opaque white cameo; Apsley Pel- 
latt, Falcon Glass Works; England, London, 
Southwark; about 1821 (5) 

95. Garniture de cheminee; cut glass with gilt 
bronze mounts; France; 1825-1830 (28) 

96. Box; opaline lustred glass with gold decora- 
tion, brass monture; England, Bristol; 1800- 
1830 (1) 

97. Pair of candelabra; cut crystal and chased 
ormolu; England, Bristol; 1800-1830 (1) 

98. Pair of vases; diamond cut, bell shape; 
England; 1800-1830 (7) 

99. Pair of flower vases; cut crystal with gilt 
bronze stands; France; 1800-1810 (28) 

100. Pair of compotes; diamond-cut ruby glass 
with gilt bronze mounts; France; 1800-1830 
(28) 

jewelry, gold- and 
silversmiths' work 

101. Pair of tapersticks; silver; Paul Storr (1771- 
1844); England, London; 1797-1798 (26) 

102. Standing cup; silver; Nicholas Hearndon 
(?); England, London; 1800-1801; with the 
arms of Frederick Augustus, Duke of York 
(1763-1827) (25) 

103. Two pairs of fruit knives and forks; silver 
gilt; Mark Bock; England, London; 1800- 
1801 (26) 

104. Snuff box; chased gold and enamel; France; 
about 1800 (39) 

105. Candelabrum; silver and Sheffield plate: 
Matthew Boulton (1728-1809); England, 
Birmingham; 1804 (9) 

106. Cup and cover; silver gilt; William Foim- 
tain; England, London; 1805-1806 (25) 

107. Cup and cover; silver; Paul Storr (1771- 
1844); England, London; 1807 (34) 

108. Replica of "the Warwick Vase"; silver-gilt; 
Ireland, Dublin; 1807-1820 (16) 

109. Cup with cover; silver-gilt; Paul Storr 
(1771-1844): England, London; 1811 (II) 

110. Centerpiece; silver; Paul Storr (1771-1844); 
England, London: 1814: given to George, 
Marquis of Huntley, by the Deputy Lieu- 
tenants of Aberdeenshire, 1813 (34) 

111. Medal; the "Waterloo Medal"; bronze: 
Thomas Wyon (1792-1817); England, Lon- 
don; 1815 (25) 

112. Commemorative medal; bronze; Thomas 
Wyon (1792-1817); England, London; 1815 
(25) 



113. Tray; Sheffield plate; England, Sheffield; 
about 1815 (25) 

114. Pair of dessert spoons; silver-gilt; R. Gar- 
rard; England, London; I8I5 (34) 

115. Replica of "the Warwick Vase"; silver-gilt; 
Benjamin Smith (active 182I-I833); Eng- 
land, London; 1817 (16) 

116. Watch; gold, enamel and pearls; England; 
1819-1820 (25) 

117. Seal case; silver-gilt with inset medal of 
George IV; Philip Rundell (active after 
1770); England, London; 1820 (16) 

118. Cruet set; glass, silver-gilt stand set with 
spinels and turquoise; John Bridges; Eng- 
land, London; 1820 (39) 

119. Perfume box; bloodstone and gold; Eng- 
land; about 1820 (39) 

120. Souvenir; blue enamel and diamonds; 
France; about 1820 (39) 

121. Pendant and pair of earrings; coral and 
gold; England; 1820-1830 (2) 

122. Dress sword; steel blade, leather scabbard, 
gold hilt and mounts; Prosser; England, 
London; 1823-1824 (2) 

123. Pair of inkpots; silver-gilt; maker I.D./A.D.; 
England, London; 1824; used by the Mar- 
quess of Conyngham, Keeper of the House- 
hold to King George IV (16) 

124. Cup in the form of a thistle; gold; maker 
J.L.; England, London; 1825; inscribed 
with "Nemo me impune lacessit," the motto 
of the Order of the Thistle (2) 

125. Watch; varicolored gold; S. I. Tobias; Eng- 
land, Liverpool; 1824-1825 (25) 

126. Sculptured group, "Adonis and Cupid"; 
silver-gilt; Paul Storr (1771-1844); England, 
London; 1827 (16) 

127. Brooch in the form of a butterfly; gold, 
diamonds and pearl; probably France; 1800- 
1820 (39) 

128. Demitasse; gold, enamel and pearls; prob- 
ably France; 1800-1820 (39) 

129. Buckle watch; gold, enamel and paste; 
attributed to William Illbury (died 1851); 
England, London; about 1830 (2) 

130. Box and cover; tortoisehell piqu6 with gold, 
and mounted with silver-gilt; probably 
England; early 19th century (25) 

131. Seal; gold, turquoise, amethyst and rock 
crystal; probably France; 1800-1830 (39) 

DECORATIVE ACCESSORIES, METALWORK 

132. Incense burner, Koro: cloisonne enamel; 
China; Ch'ien-lung (1736-1795) (30) 

133. Clock; carved ivory and porcelain; works 
by Francis Shuttleworth; England, Salis- 
bury, and India; 1780 (30) 

134. Fish bowl; enamel; China, probably Can- 
ton; early 18th century (30) 

135. Figurine; glazed terracotta and ormolu; 
China and France; period of Louis XV 
(1715-1774) (11) 

136. Candlestick in the form of an obelisk; tole 
and silver; probably Italy; about 1800 (19) 

137. Pair of wall brackets; gilded and gessoed 
wood; France or Italy; about 1800 (20) 

21 



138. Pair of candelabra; gilt bronze and crystal; 
France or England; about 1800 (28) 

139. Pair of candelabra; gilt and patined bronze 
and porphyry; France; about 1800 (28) 

140. Clock; ormolu, alabaster and Derby por- 
celain; by Benjamin Vulliamy (1775-1820); 
England, London; about 1806 (37) 

141. Pair of candelabra; black and gilded 
bronze; probably France; 1800-1810 (28) 

142. Pair of wall brackets; gilded and patined 
bronze; England or France; 1800-1810 (28) 

143. Pair o£ epergnes; cartonnage; France; about 
1810 (20) 

144. Chandelier; ormolu; Austria, Vienna; 
about 1810 (28) 

145. Pair of lamps; tole; probably France; about 
1810 (38) 

146. Pair of carved sphinxes; wood; provenance 
unknown; about 1800-1815 (8) 

147. Pair of candelabra; wood and crystal; Eng- 
land; 1800-1820 (17) 

148. Pair of wall brackets; gilded wood; prob- 
ably France; about 1810 (27) 

149. Pair of candlesticks; bronze and ormolu; 
England; about 1810 (36) 

150. Tray; tole; England; about 1810 (36) 

151. Pair of candlesticks; ormolu; England; 
about 1810-1820 (27) 

152. Pair of doorstops in the form of griffons; 
gilded metal; England; 1818-1822 (3) 

153. Fender; gilt bronze; probably designed by 
Frederick Crace (1779-1859); England, Lon- 
don; 1818-1822 (3) 

154. Pair of wall brackets; papier-mach^; Eng- 
land; about 1820 (27) 

155. Pair of vases; jasper; Russia, Ekaterinburg; 
about 1820 (39) 

156. Writing set; wood and papier-mdch^; Eng- 
land, Brighton (?); 1820-1830(3) 

157. Candelabrum; silver-gilt and bronze; Paul 
Storr (1771-1844); England, London; 1814. 
Made for the Duke of Cumberland (33) 

158. Figurine in the Chinese manner; tole; prov- 
enance unknown; about 1820 (24) 

159. Pair of figurines; tole; Holland (?); about 
1820 (38) 

160. Candlestick; mother-of-pearl and gilt 
bronze; probably France; 1820-1830 (31) 

161. Pair of sconces; enamelled metal; China, 
Canton; 1800-1830 (11) 

162. Pair of candelabra; painted metal and por- 
celain; probably France; 1800-1830 (14) 

163. Pair of candlesticks in the form of apes; 
brass; England or France; 1800-1830 (31) 

164. Plate warmer; painted and gilded metal; 
probably Austria; 1800-1830 (14) 

165. Paperweight; gilt bronze and stone; prob- 
ably France; about 1830 (31) 

166. Inkstand; ormolu and marble; England; 
early 19th century (1) 

167. Figure groups of Pan, nymphs and a putto; 
ormolu and bronze; France; early 19th cen- 
tury (6) 

168. Pair of candelabra; porcelain and gilt 
bronze; France; early 19th century (6) 

22 



169. Pair of figures in the Chinese manner; 
glazed terracotta; probably France; date 
unknown (24) 

170. Pair of figures; wood and polychrome lac- 
quer; China; date unknown (31) 

171. Tea-caddy in the form of a pagoda; mir- 
rored glass and brass; date and provenance 
unknown (24) 

TEXTILES 

172. Buff and green striped moire silk; France; 
period of Louis XVI (1774-1792) (11) 

173. Yellow satin striped moire, with ivory 
foliate border; France; period of Louis XVI 
(1774-1792) (11) 

174. Sea-green taffeta; France; period of Louis 
XVI (1774-1792) (11) 

175. Block printed cotton with scenes of the 
death of Nelson and an allegory of Britain 
mourning; England; 1806 (4) 

176. Rug or wall hanging; wool and silk; France; 
about 1810 (10) 

177. Glazed cotton chintz with scattered floral 
chinoiserie motif; England; 1810-1820 (4) 

178. Glazed cotton chintz with stylized classical 
motifs; England; 1810-1820 (4) 

179. Memorial print of the trial of Queen Caro- 
line; cotton, copper-plate printed; England; 
1820 (13) 

180. Memorial print of the Coronation of King 
George IV; copper-plate printed cotton; 
England; 1821 (13) 

181. Glazed cotton chintz; floral pattern with 
bamboo trellis; England; about 1820 (24) 

182. Striped blue satin and woven silk with 
chinoiserie pattern; France; about 1820 (24) 

183. Tan toile with printed chinoiserie pattern 
in rose and brown; England or France; 
about 1830 (24) 

184. Glazed cotton chintz; floral pattern, stripes 
and caryatides; England; 1800-1830 (4) 

WALLPAPERS 

185. "Paysage Indien"; scenic wallpaper; by 
Joseph Dufour (1752-1827); France, Paris; 
1815 (23) 

186. Double border; probably designed by Fred- 
erick Crace (1779-1859); England; 1815-1820 
(4) 

187. Bamboo pattern; probably designed by 
Frederick Crace (1779-1859); England; 1815- 
1820 (4) 

188. Dragon pattern; probably designed by 
Frederick Crace (1779-1859); England; 
about 1822; (4) 

189. Arcuated repeat pattern; probably de- 
signed by Frederick Crace (1779-1859); 
England; 1925 (4) 

190. Tan bamboo lattice pattern on green 
ground; probably designed by Frederick 
Crace (1779-1859); England; 1951 (4) 

191. Gold rosette pattern on claret ground; 
probably designed by Frederick Crace 
(1779-1859); England; 1952 (4) 



THE PK-IHCX REGEHT'S STTJLE 

Selected References from The Cooper Union Libraries 



Ackermann, Rudolf. A selection o£ ornaments 
for the use of sculptors, painters, carvers, 
modellers, etc. London, Repository of Arts, 
1818-19. 2v. in 1. 

Brown, Richard. The rudiments of drawing 
cabinet and upholstery furniture. 2d. ed. 
London, M. Taylor, 1835. 

Edwards, Ralph. The last phase of Regency 
design. Burlington Magazine, v. 71, pp. 267- 
272, Dec. 1937. 

Mr. Luke Forman and the Empire style, 

a collection formed between 1795 and 1820. 
Country Life, v. 67, pp. 694-696, May 10, 1930. 

Elton, John. Some Regency furniture. Apollo, 
V. 37, pp. 67-69, March, 1943. 

GyfEord, E. Designs for elegant cottages and 
small villas. London, J. Taylor, 1806. 

Hope, Thomas. Household furniture and in- 
terior decoration. London, Longman, Hurst, 
Rees and Orme, 1807. 

Hussey, Christopher. Four Regency houses. 
Cou?i(r)iL!7<?,v. 69, pp. 450-456, April 11, 1931. 

Regency furniture at Southill Park. Coun- 
try Life, V. 66, pp. 841-845, Dec. 7, 1929. 

Jourdain, Margaret. English interiors in smaller 
houses from the Restoration to the Regency, 
1660-1830. New York, Scribner, 1923. 

Regency furniture. London, Country Life, 

1934. 

Laking, Guy Francis. The furniture of Windsor 
Castle. London, Bradbury Agnew, 1905. pp. 
55-72. 

McClelland, Nancy. Duncan Phyfe and the Eng- 
lish Regency. New York, W. R. Scott, 1939. 

MacQuoid, Percy. A history of English furni- 
ture. London, Lawrence & Bullen, 1908. 4 v. 
V. 4, The age of satinwood. 

Middleton, Charles. Designs for gates and rails 
suitable to parks, pleasure grounds, balconys, 
etc. London, 1800? 

Musgrave, Clifford. The Regency exhibition at 
Brighton. Connoisseur, v. 128, pp. 90-95, Nov. 
1951. 

Royal Pavilion. Brighton, Bredon & 

Heginbotham, 1951. 

Nash, John. Illustrations of Her Majesty's Pal- 
ace at Brighton, formerly the Pavilion. Lon- 
don, J. B. Nichols, 1838. 

Pilcher, Donald. The Regency style. London, 
B. T. Batsford, 1948. 

Pinto, Edward H. Regency furniture. Apollo, 
V. 56, pp. 111-115 and 191-194, Oct. and Dec. 
1952, and v. 57, pp. 40-43, Feb. 1953. 

Price, Sir Uvedale. Sir Uvedale Price on the 
picturesque, with an essay on the origin of 



taste, and much original matter, by Sir 
Thomas Dick Lauder. Edinburgh, Caldwell, 
Lloyd, 1842. 

Pugin, Augustus Welby Northmore. Gothic 
furniture. London, M. A. Nattali, 1827. 

Regency Festival, Brighton. Souvenir pro- 
gramme and catalogue. Brighton, Dolphin 
Press, 1951. 

Repton, Humphry. Designs for the Pavilion at 
Brighton. London, J. C. Stadler, 1808. 

Observations on the theory and practice 

of landscape gardening. London, I. Taylor, 
1803. 

Reveirs-Hopkins, A. E. The Sheraton period; 
Post - Chippendale designers. New York, 
Stokes, n.d. (Little books about old furniture. 
English furniture, v. 4). 

Roberts, Henry David. A history of the Royal 
Pavilion, Brighton, with an account of its 
original furniture and decoration. London, 
Country Life, 1939. 

The Repository of Arts, Literature, Fashions, 
etc. Collection of plates with mounted sam- 
ples of textiles and papers. London, 1809-13. 

Collection of colored engravings of furni- 
ture. London, 1828. 

Sheraton, Thomas. The cabinet-maker and up- 
holsterer's drawing book. London, T. Bensley, 
1802. Facsimile, London, Gibbings & Co., 
1895. 

Sitwell, Osbert, and Barton, Margaret. Brighton. 
London, Faber & Faber, 1925. 

Smith, George. The cabinet-maker and uphol- 
sterer's guide. London, Jones & Co., 1826. 

Smith, Harold Clifford. Buckingham Palace, its 
furniture, decorations, and history. London, 
Country Life, 1931. 

Stroud, Dorothy. Henry Holland. London, Art 
and Technics, 1950. 

Summerson, John. Georgian London. New 
York, Scribner, 1946. 

John Nash, Architect to King George IV. 

London, Allen & Unwin, 1949. 

Sir John Soane. London, Art and Tech- 
nics, 1952. 

Symonds, Robert Wemyss. The classic and Re- 
gency tastes in English furniture, 1765-1820. 
Connoisseur, v. 108, pp. 101-107, Sept. 1941. 

Wellesley, Lord Gerald. Regency furniture. 
Burlington Magazine, v. 70, pp. 233-240, May, 
1937. 

Whittock, Nathaniel. The decorative painters' 
and glaziers' guide. London, I. T. Hinton, 
1828. 

Whitney N. Morgan 

23 



COHTKIBUTORS . 

To the Exhibition 
Arthur Ackerman and Son, Inc. (1) D. M. and P. Manheim (21) 



Berry-Hill, Inc. (2) 

H. Blairman and Sons, Ltd. (3) 

The Cooper Union Museum (4) 

The Corning Museum of Glass, 
Corning, N.Y. (5) 

Dalva Brothers, Inc. (6) 

Basil Dighton, Inc. (7) 

Empire Exchange, Inc. (8) 

Robert Ensko, Inc. (9) 

Carl Federer (10) 

French and Company, Inc. (II) 

Mrs. Caesar A. Grasselli, II (12) 

Mrs. Agnes J. Holden (13) 

Miss Josephine Howell (14) 

J. A. Lloyd Hyde (15) 

Ralph Hyman, Museum Silver 

Shop, Inc. (16) 

Mrs. Francis H. Lenygon (17) 

James A. Lewis and Son, Inc. (18) 

Joseph LoMBARDO (19) 

Louis Lyons, Inc. (20) 



Mrs. Syrie Maugham (22) 

Nancy McClelland, Inc. (23) 

Miss Elinor Merrell (24) 

The Metropolitan Museum 
OF Art (25) 

Mrs. Edward Munves (26) 

Needham's Antiques, Inc. (27) 

A. R. Nesle (28) 

The North Carolina State 
Art Society, Raleigh, N. C. (29) 

Frank Partridge, Inc. (30) 

Olga Erlanger's Past and 
Present, Inc. (31) 

James Robinson, Inc. (32) 

The Rosenbach Company (33) 

S. J. Shrubsole (34) 

Hans Soffer, Girondelle 
Decorators, Inc. (35) 

Symons Galleries, Inc. (36) 

Arthur S. Vernay, Inc. (37) 

Frederick P. Victoria (38) 

A La Vieille Russie, Inc. (39) 



Contemporary decorative wallpapers have been most gener- 
ously given by: 

Cole and Son, Ltd. Nancy McClelland, Inc. 

Katzenbach and Warren Piazza Prints, Inc. 

24 



16 



fy 



± in ■■■ ^ ^ — z ^ z 

LIBRARIES SMITHSONIAN INSTITUTION NOIinillSNI NVINOSHilWS S3iyVM8n LI BR 




NOIiflillSNI NVINOSHilWS S3ldVaan LIBRARIES SMITHSONIAN INSTITUTION NOIIH 




o ^"^ 

H 

I LIBRARIES SMITHSONIAN INSTITUTION NOIinillSNI NVINOSHilWS S3iaVWan LIBR 





J NOIinillSNI NVINOSHilWS S3IMVyan libraries SMITHSONIAN INSTITUTION NOIll 
w z ^ w z .., w z .V ^ 







if LI BR AR I ES*^SMITHSONIAN_ INSTITUTION NOIinillSNI_NVINOSHllWS S3iyvyan_LIBR 
J^ N0linillSNl"'NVIN0SHllWS""S3 iyvyan~L!BRARI ES""SMITHSONIAN~INSTITUTION~ NOIlf 





I LIBRARIES SMITHSONIAN INSTITUTION NOIinillSNI NVINOSHilWS S3IMV8an LIBR 




I NOIinillSNI NVINOSHllWs'^S3iyVy8n^LIBRARIEs'^SMlTHSONIAN'^INSTITUTlON NOIlf 

^ = (O = w ^ 

-^ zi \S? 

_ Z -J 

I LIBRARIES SMITHSONIAN INSTITUTION NOIinillSNI NVINOSHilWS S3iavyan LIBR 





^ NOIinillSNI NVINOSHilWS S3IMVaan libraries SMITHSONIAN INSTITUTION NOIlf 



>rs^^ ^ 



niliSNI^NVINOSHilWs'^SH I hVU 8 H^LI B RAR 1 ES^SMITHSONIAN INSTITUTION NOIinillSNI_ 




5 \Vi 
?ARIES~SMITHSONIAN~INSTITUTION N0liniIlSNrNVIN0SHilWS~S3 I y Vd 8 H^LI B RAR I ES 




niiiSNi NviNosHims SBiavyan libraries Smithsonian institution, NoiiniiiSNi_ 

RAR I ES'"SMITHS0NIAN_ institution _N0liniliSNI_NVIN0SHiIWS^S3 I y Va 8 n_LI B RAR I ES^ 





LnillSNI~'NVIN0SHilWS^S3iyvyan~'LIBRARIES''SMITHS0NIAN~INSTITUTI0N NOIiniliSNI 
n > z r- Z f Z ' 







?/ c 




RARIES SMITHSONIAN INSTITUTION NOIiniliSNI NVINOSHIIWS S3 I y VaS IT LI B RAR I ES 

tn —-,(/) Z '" ^ -. < 

miliSNI NVIN0SHllWs'^S3iava8n^LIBRARIES*^SMITHS0NIAN INSTITUTION NOIiniliSNI. 
~ tfi — 

I) ^ 

Z _J z — _| Z -J 

RARIES SMITHSONIAN INSTITUTION NOIiniliSNI NVINOSHIIWS S3 I aVM 8 II^LI B R AR I ES 

iniliSNI~NVIN0SHilWS,_S3iavaan~LIBRARIES,„SMITHS0NIAN~INSTITUTI0N^N0liniliSNI 

o 








I RAR I ES'^SMITHSONIAN^ INSTITUTION NOIiniliSNI NVIN0SH1IWS*^S3 I dVa 8 IT^L' B RAR I ES 



l^LIE